ArticleBMC health services research2026
Regulatory compliance of mental healthcare professionals: determinants of reporting waiting time data.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLong waiting times for healthcare are a growing issue, leading to prolonged patient suffering, reduced quality of life in mental healthcare, and inefficiencies in care delivery. Reducing waiting times has become a key policy goal in many OECD countries, with governments relying on accurate waiting time data to inform interventions. Regulatory agencies require healthcare professionals to report this data, but compliance is often lacking. In the Netherlands, self-employed mental healthcare professionals have particularly low compliance rates. This non-compliance undermines the accuracy of waiting time calculations, making policy interventions difficult. This study explores both economic and psychological motivations behind non-compliance in self-employed mental healthcare professionals in the Netherlands.
methodThis study examines whether the determinants of the Theory of Planned Behaviour, along with moral obligation, perceived detection risk, and resistance, can predict compliance among self-employed mental healthcare professionals. Survey data were collected from 481 participants, and structural equation modelling was used to analyse the relationships between these factors and compliance behaviour.
resultsWe found that scepticism about regulation on submitting waiting times negatively influenced attitudes towards compliance, and attitudes positively influenced compliance intention. The perceived detection risk positively influenced, and perceived controllability negatively influenced compliance intentions. In turn, compliance intentions predicted actual compliance. We found that reactance, subjective norms, moral obligation, and inertia had no significant impact on mental healthcare professionals’ intention to comply with waiting time reporting or their actual compliance behaviour.
conclusionTo increase compliance, it is crucial to understand how intention to comply and actual compliance are influenced. This study identifies the psychological and economic factors affecting compliance with waiting time reporting among mental healthcare professionals. These findings offer policymakers valuable insights for designing interventions to improve administrative compliance in mental healthcare.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.